Jon Berndt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > That's good. Maybe a more generic Historical category would be
> > useful?
>
> Don't all of our aircraft fit into that category?
>
> :-)
Well I suppose you could call anything that isn't built any more historical,
but for the most part the term see
- Original Message -
From:
Lee Elliott
To: FlightGear developers
discussions
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 8:43
AM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] heads up
- aircraft reorg
On Sunday 21 September 2003 08:35, Erik Hofman wrote:>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:&
Curt wrote:
>This is another step towards making aircraft
>self contained in their own subdirectory. The end goals is to be able
>to install / remove / distribute aircraft that are entirely contained
>in their own subdirectory tree making things easier on everyone
>[hopefully]. :-)
Sounds good :
On Sunday 21 September 2003 08:35, Erik Hofman wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Are there any plans for helicopters, rockets, ballons and airships?
>
>
> The X-15 is considered a rocket.
>
> Also I've collected some NACA flight data documents of the U.S.S. Los
> Angles. I haven't had ti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are there any plans for helicopters, rockets, ballons and airships?
The X-15 is considered a rocket.
Also I've collected some NACA flight data documents of the U.S.S. Los
Angles. I haven't had time to construct a JSBSim configuration files for
this airship but I think
> We might also want to start thinking of an official organization
> hierarchy such as:
>
> Aircraft/
> LightSingles/
> JetFighters/
> CommercialJets/
> CommercialTurboProps/
> Bombers/
> WWI/
> WWII/
> SailPlanes/
> Experimental/
>
> Regards,
>
> Curt.
Are there any plans for he
"Curtis L. Olson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Two areas of concern. There are about 40 variations on the c172 and
> about 20 variations on the c310 with different incantations and
> aliases and various conglomerations of yasim, jsbsim, 3d cockpits, 2d
> cockpits, etc. etc. etc. This was kind of
> That's good. Maybe a more generic Historical category would be
> useful?
Don't all of our aircraft fit into that category?
:-)
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
JD Fenech writes:
> I know this is slightly off topic, but what is the possibility of having
> a "one aircraft, one file" type configuration. The idea is basically to
> put all of the requisite files for a particular aircraft into some kind
> of archive file, such as a tarball, and then drop the
I know this is slightly off topic, but what is the possibility of having
a "one aircraft, one file" type configuration. The idea is basically to
put all of the requisite files for a particular aircraft into some kind
of archive file, such as a tarball, and then drop the archives into one
direct
Jorge Van Hemelryck wrote:
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:29:48 +0200
Matevz Jekovec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For modern military aircrafts, I would make the following hierarchy:
- Fighter (most of F-xx, Rafale, MiG-s, Sukhoi-s)
- Attack (A-10, Harrier, Tornado, Mirage 2000, my J-22, Su
On Saturday 20 September 2003 17:45, Jorge Van Hemelryck wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:29:48 +0200
> Matevz Jekovec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > For modern military aircrafts, I would make the following hierarchy:
> > - Fighter (most of F-xx, Rafale, MiG-s, Sukhoi-s)
> > - Attack (A-10, Harr
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:29:48 +0200
Matevz Jekovec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For modern military aircrafts, I would make the following hierarchy:
> - Fighter (most of F-xx, Rafale, MiG-s, Sukhoi-s)
> - Attack (A-10, Harrier, Tornado, Mirage 2000, my J-22, Su-25)
> - Bomber (F-117, B-1, B-2, B-52
Not to forget the prop liners before the jets.
Also by the by is there any intention of updating to 9.3 in the near
future.Just asking to see whats in the pipe line
Cheers
Innis
"Curtis L. Olson" writes
>
We might also want to start thinking of an official organization
hierarchy such as:
Aircra
We might also want to start thinking of an official organization
hierarchy such as:
Aircraft/
LightSingles/
JetFighters/
CommercialJets/
CommercialTurboProps/
Bombers/
WWI/
WWII/
SailPlanes/
Experimental/
For modern military aircrafts, I would make the following hierarchy:
- Fighter (m
Heads up aircraft designers!
I just committed a fairly significant change to both fgfs source and
data CVS repositories. This is another step towards making aircraft
self contained in their own subdirectory. The end goals is to be able
to install / remove / distribute aircraft that are entirely
16 matches
Mail list logo
